National Grid meters opposed

So-called “smart meters” are anything but, say opponents of a National Grid program to install the new wireless electric meters at 15,000 homes and businesses in the city.

While National Grid says the new meters are perfectly safe, critics maintain the devices emit potentially harmful radiation and also pose threats to privacy and security.

“One of these meters will be installed on my grandchildren’s wall over my cold, dead body,” said Clare Donegan, 52, of Quincy, who is associated with the website HaltMAsmartmeters.org. She was scheduled to give a presentation Monday night at the Frances Perkins Branch of the Worcester Public Library on the anti-smart-meter effort.

Ms. Donegan warned that personal information gathered via the tracking of energy usage — when people are at work, when they are on vacation — “will now be available to who? We don’t know. … “The whole Big Brother aspect bothers me.”

National Grid, which distributes power to most of Central Massachusetts, is installing the wireless smart meters in Worcester as part of a pilot program. The meters provide real-time information that enables the tracking of energy use.

The program includes a new pricing model that will ask customers to pay more for using electricity during peak periods, and less for using it during low-demand periods. Customers can avoid higher rates by changing their use habits.

“We understand that some customers may have questions or concerns about new technologies,” said Deborah Drew, New England media relations manager for National Grid.

“We want to assure them that we have no reason to believe the meters in our program are unsafe. They operate outside, the signal is intermittent, and it operates at frequencies considerably lower than appliances and devices we all use on a daily basis.

“The safety of our customers, employees and the communities that we serve are our highest priority,” Ms. Drew said.

Regarding concerns raised about the possible unwarranted monitoring of customers’ private lives, Ms. Drew said: “For many years, have been safeguarding the privacy of customers’ data and personal information and will continue to do so, even with the advent of new technology.”

The transition to a “smart” power grid is a state and federal priority. National Grid’s program in Worcester complies with a state law mandating all Massachusetts utilities test smart grid technology among a sample of customers.

The Edison Electric Institute, an association of utility companies, estimates that more than half of U.S. households will have smart meters by 2015.

“What’s the hurry?” Ms. Donegan said. “Why are we in such a hurry to do this?” Her aim, she said, “is to derail the pilot in Worcester in order to put the brakes on.”

Ms. Donegan said the group affiliated with the HaltMAsmartmeters website is small, about 30 people across Massachusetts. An online petition linked to the website had 219 signatures on Monday.

One opponent, Patricia Burke of Gloucester, said she is involved in the anti-smart meter campaign because she is sensitive to electromagnetic frequencies, and is prone to headaches and fatigue when around cellphones and Wi-Fi.

She said she has moved 14 times in the past four years as a result. She said her neighborhood of Lanesville, with many antique houses, doesn’t have much activity, but come summer and the onset of the tourist season she’ll likely move again.

Ms. Burke, a writer and former yoga teacher in her 50s, said she would like to see the deployment of smart meters halted until further study can be done on possible health risks posed by the technology.

The National Grid spokeswoman, Ms. Drew, said customers can opt out of the pilot if they choose.

A report commissioned by the Vermont Legislature on the potential threat to human health posed by smart meters found that the devices emit only a small fraction of the maximum exposure levels allowed by the Federal Communications Commission, the Associated Press reported in January.

The maximum peak radio frequency level measured 1 foot from a meter was 3.9 percent of the FCC’s top exposure limit, said the Vermont Department of Public Service, which hired the Washington state company that prepared the report.

The smart meter exposure compared with 1 percent of the radio frequency exposure limit for a cordless phone, 6.5 percent for a microwave oven, and 10.5 percent for a cellphone.